HYDER V AIDAT-SARRAN & AIDAT-SARRAN [2024] EWHC 3686 (SCCO)
Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC imposed what he termed a “stern sanction by CPR 44.11 standards“—a 75% reduction—where solicitors failed to rectify “egregious” defects across two bills, confirming vicarious liability for costs draftsmen cannot be escaped by delegation.
When determining relief from sanctions for late service of a document, the court will first consider whether the breach of the specific order was serious or significant in isolation, and if it was not, relief will usually be granted. The service of a defective document within the deadline may constitute belated compliance, with the operative breach being the delay only. [4, 5, 8, 9]
A solicitor is vicariously responsible for the failings of their costs draftsman as if the work had been performed by the solicitor themself, and retains a direct supervisory responsibility to apply oversight to the work produced. [17]
The court’s power under CPR 44.11 may be engaged where a party’s conduct in relation to costs proceedings amounts to non-compliance with a rule, practice direction, or court order, or constitutes unreasonable or improper conduct. [18]
When considering a sanction under CPR 44.11, the court will give anxious consideration as to whether a sanction less draconian than strikeout can properly meet the justice of the case, even in the face of serious and persistent misconduct. [21, 22, 23]
In exercising its discretion on sanction under CPR 44.11, the court may consider a party’s failure to acknowledge or rectify identified failings, and a lack of insight or contrition, as highly relevant factors to the level of sanction imposed. [16]
